Delhi High Court passes unique ‘dynamic+ injunction’ to curb illegal streaming of content of 6 studios

Delhi High Court passes unique ‘dynamic+ injunction’ to curb illegal streaming of content of 6 studios

Orders the Central government and Internet Service Providers to block the websites within a week

The Delhi High Court has restrained 16 rogue websites as well as their mirror/redirects or alphanumeric variations from streaming or making available for download existing and future content of six American studios.

In the Universal City Studios LLC & Ors vs DotMovies.Baby and Ors case, Justice Prathiba M Singh stated, “To keep pace with the dynamic nature of the infringement that is undertaken by hydra-headed websites, this court has deemed it appropriate to issue this ‘Dynamic+ injunction’ to protect copyrighted works as soon as they are created. This is to ensure that no irreparable loss is caused to the authors and owners of copyrighted works, as there is an imminent possibility of works being uploaded on rogue websites or their newer versions immediately upon the films/shows/series, etc.”

Netflix Studios, Disney Enterprises, Warners Bros, Columbia Pictures, Paramount Pictures, and Universal City Studios had approached the Court stating that the rogue websites were permitting the viewing, streaming, accessing, and downloading of their copyrighted content without any license or authorization.

Some websites were newer versions of rogue websites injuncted in other cases. The websites asked viewers to suggest more content that could be uploaded. They were also enticing people to join platforms like Telegram, which supports sharing of voluminous content.

The bench held that such websites had the potential to curb the creation of copyrighted content and hurt the thriving content creation industry in India and abroad.

Justice Singh emphasized the need to evolve a global consensus to protect copyright owners. That’s because despite Internet Service Providers (ISPs) blocking the websites, they could be accessed through VPN servers, and “other methods to which the long arm of the law cannot extend.”

The Court ruled, “Owing to the nature of the illegalities that rogue websites indulge in, there is a need to pass injunctions which are also dynamic qua the plaintiffs, as it is seen that upon any film or series being released, they may be immediately uploaded on the rogue websites, causing severe and instant monetary loss.

It added, “The copyright in future comes into existence immediately upon the work being created, and the plaintiffs may not be able to approach the court for each and every film or series that is produced to secure an injunction against piracy.”

The Judge stated that as innovation in technology continued, remedies should also be calibrated by the courts. It clarified that an injunction order on future works could not be granted in every case and that granting such relief would depend on the facts.

It passed the interim order of injunction restraining the rogue websites from streaming and distributing any copyrighted content of the studios.

The bench also allowed the plaintiffs to implead any mirror/redirect/alphanumeric variations of the websites by filing applications. The injunction order would also become operational against these proxies.

Advocates Saikrishna Rajagopal, Suhasini Raina, Anjali Agarwal, Mehr Sidhu, Raghav Goyal, and R Ramya appeared for the plaintiff studios.

The Central Government Standing Counsel Harish V Shankar appeared for the Department of Technology and the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology.